Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 cited by

AI Safety in Generative AI Large Language Models: A Survey

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2407.18369 v1 pith:PFJ5JRHE submitted 2024-07-06 cs.CY cs.CL

classification cs.CYcs.CL
keywords llmssafetygenerativemodelssurveyresearchlanguageassociated
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Large Language Model (LLMs) such as ChatGPT that exhibit generative AI capabilities are facing accelerated adoption and innovation. The increased presence of Generative AI (GAI) inevitably raises concerns about the risks and safety associated with these models. This article provides an up-to-date survey of recent trends in AI safety research of GAI-LLMs from a computer scientist's perspective: specific and technical. In this survey, we explore the background and motivation for the identified harms and risks in the context of LLMs being generative language models; our survey differentiates by emphasising the need for unified theories of the distinct safety challenges in the research development and applications of LLMs. We start our discussion with a concise introduction to the workings of LLMs, supported by relevant literature. Then we discuss earlier research that has pointed out the fundamental constraints of generative models, or lack of understanding thereof (e.g., performance and safety trade-offs as LLMs scale in number of parameters). We provide a sufficient coverage of LLM alignment -- delving into various approaches, contending methods and present challenges associated with aligning LLMs with human preferences. By highlighting the gaps in the literature and possible implementation oversights, our aim is to create a comprehensive analysis that provides insights for addressing AI safety in LLMs and encourages the development of aligned and secure models. We conclude our survey by discussing future directions of LLMs for AI safety, offering insights into ongoing research in this critical area.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. LLM in the Middle: A Systematic Review of Threats and Mitigations to Real-World LLM-based Systems

    cs.CR 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A systematic review that categorizes LLM threats, severity scores, and mitigations across development and operation life cycles and multiple deployment scenarios.

  2. The safety failures we are not instrumenting: a perspective on hidden safety-critical challenges in modern AI systems

    cs.CY 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    AI safety should be measured by whether deployed systems keep errors visible, contestable, containable, and recoverable across five integrity layers, not only by whether individual model outputs look safe.

  3. Contextual Memory Intelligence -- A Foundational Paradigm for Human-AI Collaboration and Reflective Generative AI Systems

    cs.AI 2025-05 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    Contextual Memory Intelligence reframes memory as dynamic infrastructure and proposes the Insight Layer to preserve decision rationale, detect semantic drift, and support human-in-the-loop reflection.

  4. Agentic Web: Weaving the Next Web with AI Agents

    cs.AI 2025-07 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A position paper defines the Agentic Web as the next web era and proposes a three-dimensional conceptual framework for understanding and building it.

Pith tools